An appeals court has thrown out a Fort Worth man's 60-year prison sentence, ruling that a judge violated the man's rights by ordering him to be shocked by a stun belt when he didn't "behave" in the courtroom.

Terry Lee Morris, 54, was convicted in June 2016 of soliciting sexual performance from a 15-year-old. The Eighth Court of Appeals in El Paso tossed the conviction on Feb. 28 and ordered a new trial.

Tarrant County Judge George Gallagher told a bailiff to shock Morris three times when he didn't answer the judge as directed, according to court transcripts cited in the appeals court's opinion. The shocks scared Morris so much that he was afraid to return to the courtroom, missing part of his trial.

Terry Lee Morris

(Texas Department of Criminal Justice)

Stun belts, which deliver an eight-second, 50,000-volt shock by remote control, are typically used on defendants accused of violent crimes who pose security threats in court. But the appeals court said the stun belt was not used that way on Morris.

"While the trial court's frustration with an obstreperous defendant is understandable, the judge's disproportionate response is not," Justice Yvonne T. Rodriguez said in the court's opinion. "We do not believe that trial judges can use stun belts to enforce decorum.

"A stun belt is a device meant to ensure physical safety; it is not an operant condition collar meant to punish a defendant until he obeys a judge's whim. This Court cannot sit idly by and say nothing when a judge turns a court of law into a Skinner Box, electrocuting a defendant until he provides the judge with behavior he likes."

Morris remains in the Wynne Unit in Huntsville. Prison officials said the Texas Department of Criminal Justice is waiting to hear from the court about whether Morris will be retried in Tarrant County or will be released. A spokeswoman for the Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney's Office said the agency has no comment about whether it will seek a new trial.

Gallagher could not be reached for comment. He previously had presided over Attorney General Ken Paxton's criminal case but was removed by an appeals court after he moved the case from Collin to Harris County.

The Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct said that he does not have any public history of disciplinary issues on his record, but that it could not comment on whether there are any pending complaints against him.

Tarrant County District Judge George Gallagher presides over Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's pretrial hearing at the Collin County Courthouse on Dec. 1, 2015, in McKinney.

(

Jae S. Lee / Staff Photographer

)

During the trial, Gallagher had the stun belt strapped to Morris' leg. The situation grew heated between Morris and Gallagher on the first day of the guilt-innocence phase when the judge asked Morris for his plea.

"Sir, before I say that, I have the right to make a defense," Morris replied to the judge.

Morris had lawsuits filed against Gallagher and his attorney, he said, and he wanted both men recused from his case.

Gallagher immediately sent the jury out of the courtroom.

"Mr. Morris, I am giving you one warning. You will not make any additional outbursts like that, because two things will happen," he said. "No. 1, I will either remove you from the courtroom or I will use the shock belt on you."

"All right, sir," Morris said.

"Now, are you going to follow the rules?" the judge asked.

"Sir, I've asked you to recuse yourself," Morris replied.

"Are you going to follow the rules?" Gallagher asked again.

Morris continued: "I have a lawsuit pending against you."

"Hit him," Gallagher said to the bailiff, who complied and shocked Morris with the stun belt.

Gallagher asked Morris if he was going to behave now. Morris said he has a history of mental illness.

"Hit him again," Gallagher said.

The bailiff delivered another shock with the remote control.

"I have a history of mental illness. You're wrong for doing this," Morris said.

"Are you going to behave?" Gallagher asked.

Morris replied that he was on medication for his disability and that the judge was "torturing" him for seeking recusal. He asked to represent himself in court and Gallagher asked him how far he had gone in school.

"Sir, that's beside the point. ... No one wants to be represented by someone they have a lawsuit against. No one wants a judge to preside over their case who the lawsuit is against," Morris said.

"Mr. Morris, are you going to answer my question?" the judge asked.

Morris said, "I've asked you, I'm filing a motion asking ..."

"Would you hit him again?" Gallagher asked the bailiff.

Morris was removed from the courtroom after being shocked a third time and did not return until the second day of the punishment phase.

His attorney, Bill Ray, told the judge that Morris said he was too scared to come back into the courtroom.

In an interview with Texas Lawyer, Ray said he didn't object to the use of the stun belt during the trial because Morris was "like a loaded cannon ready to go off." He also said he didn't believe Morris was actually being shocked by the belt.

In an overview of stun belts and their effects, the court's opinion cited a 1998 Washington Post story of a Maryland police sergeant who described the sensation of being shocked with a stun belt during a training exercise. He said it was as if "you had nine-inch nails and you tried to rip my sides out and then you put a heat lamp on me."

The court also cited another case in Texas in which a corrections officer died after receiving two 45,000-volt shocks during a stun belt training exercise. His autopsy showed he died from cardiac arrhythmia and it was ruled that he died as a result of the shocks.

Rodriguez, the appeals court judge, said that there is potential for stun belts to be abused and that using them when there aren't security concerns, as in Morris' case, must be deterred.

"We must speak out against it, lest we allow practices like these to affront the very dignity of the proceedings we seek to protect and lead our courts to drift from justice into barbarism," she wrote in the court's opinion.

The opinion said the court is "deeply hesitant" to overturn a guilty verdict in this case when Morris himself doesn't even contest legal sufficiency in his conviction. But because it was found that the improper use of the stun belt kept Morris from attending his own trial — a violation of the Constitution's Sixth Amendment — the court ordered a new trial.